Pancreatic stone protein point-of-care testing can reduce healthcare expenditure in sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction in response to infection. Early recognition and rapid treatment are critical to patient outcomes and cost savings, but sepsis is difficult to diagnose because of its non-specific symptoms. Biomarkers such as pancreatic stone protein (PSP) offer rapid results with greater sensitivity and specificity than standard laboratory tests. METHODS: This study developed a decision tree model to compare a rapid PSP test to standard of care in the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) to diagnose patients with suspected sepsis. Key model parameters included length of hospital and ICU stay, readmission due to infection, cost of sepsis testing, length of antibiotic treatment, antibiotic resistance, and clostridium difficile infections. Model inputs were determined by review of sepsis literature. RESULTS: The rapid PSP test was found to reduce costs by $1688 per patient in the ED and $3315 per patient in the ICU compared to standard of care. Cost reductions were primarily driven by the specificity of PSP in the ED and the sensitivity of PSP in the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the model indicate that PSP testing is cost saving compared to standard of care in diagnosis of sepsis. The abundance of sepsis cases in the ED and ICU make these findings important in the clinical field and further support the potential of sensitive and specific markers of sepsis to not only improve patient outcomes but also reduce healthcare expenditures.

Cost impact analysis of novel host-response diagnostic for patients with community-acquired pneumonia in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: There is significant over-prescription of antibiotics for suspected community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) patients as bacterial and viral pathogens are difficult to differentiate. To address this issue, a host response diagnostic called MeMed BV (MMBV) was developed that accurately differentiates bacterial from viral infection at the point of need by integrating measurements of multiple biomarkers. A literature-based cost-impact model was developed that compared the cost impact and clinical benefits between using the standard of care diagnostics combined with MMBV relative to standard of care diagnostics alone. METHODS: The patient population was stratified according to the pneumonia severity index, and cost savings were considered from payer and provider perspectives. Four scenarios were considered. The main analysis considers the cost impact of differences in antibiotic stewardship and resulting adverse events. The first, second, and third scenarios combine the impacts on antibiotic stewardship with changes in hospital admission probability, length of hospital stay and diagnosis related group (DRG) reallocation, and hospital admission probability, length of stay, and DRG reallocation in combination, respectively. RESULTS: The main analysis results show overall per-patient savings of $37 for payers and $223 for providers. Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 produced savings of $137, $189, and $293 for payers, and $339, $713, and $809 for providers, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Models are simulations of real-world clinical processes, and are not sensitive to variations in clinical practice driven by differences in physician practice styles, differences in facility-level practice patterns, and patient comorbidities expected to exacerbate the clinical impact of CAP. Hospital models are limited to costs and do not consider differences in revenue associated with each approach. CONCLUSIONS: Introducing MMBV to the current SOC diagnostic process is likely to be cost-saving to both hospitals and payers when considering impacts on antibiotic distribution, hospital admission rate, hospital LOS, and DRG reallocation.

Health related quality of life utility weights for economic evaluation through different stages of chronic kidney disease: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: A Task Force from the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) provides recommendations on how to systematically identify and appraise health state utility (HSU) weights for cost-effectiveness analyses. We applied these recommendations to conduct a systematic review (SR) to identify HSU weights for different stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD), renal replacement therapy (RRT) and complications. METHODS: MEDLINE® and Embase were searched for interventional and non-interventional studies reporting HSU weights for patients with CKD stages 1-5 or RRT. As per ISPOR Task Force Guidance, study quality criteria, applicability for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and generalisability to a broad CKD population were used to grade studies as either 1 (recommended), 2 (to be considered if there are no data from grade 1 studies) or 3 (not recommended). RESULTS: A total of 17 grade 1 studies were included in this SR with 51 to 1767 participants, conducted in the UK, USA, Canada, China, Spain, and multiple-countries. Health related quality of life (HRQL) instruments used in the studies included were EQ-5D-3L (10 studies), SF-6D (4 studies), HUI2/HUI3 (1 study), and combinations (2 studies). Although absolute values for HSU weights varied among instruments, HSU weights decreased with CKD severity in a consistent manner across all instruments. CONCLUSIONS: This SR identified HSU weights for a range of CKD states and showed that HRQL decreases with CKD progression. Data were available to inform cost-effectiveness analysis in CKD in a number of geographies using instruments acceptable by HTA agencies.